Here’s the thing about equality intersectionality.

A serious effort to reduce socio-economic inequality (that did nothing on race or gender) would inevitably have disproportionate benefits to BAME communities and women.

Because they are more likely to be poor. (1/?)

So Liz Truss’s starting point is not off the wall.

*Sometimes* efforts to increase BAME inclusion or female diversity end up helping only those who were privileged already. The same woman who sits on 8 boards. The privately educated middle class child of a lawyer who gets onto a special internship to improve diversity in the law.

If you want to seriously address racial and gender disparities you need to also tackle poverty and sociology economic inequality. You have to be intersectional.

Because the middle classes - including BAME people and women in them - are good at protecting their privilege.

But the same is true if you start - as Liz Truss does - on the other side of the equation.

As I said: reduce inequality and women and BAME people will disproportionately benefit.

BUT